|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
For greater certainty, my comments below are by reference to the $INDU
symbol in DBC Signal and the INDU symbol in BMI.
>Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 10:49:02
>To: Omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx
>From: Michael Paauwe <mpaauwe@xxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: Re: More Bad News for Prophet Users.
>
>At 12:43 PM 12/16/97 -0500, Craig Nelson wrote:
>>
>>
>>I received the response below from Prophet in regards to why Prophet's INDU
>>cash prices differed from Bloomberg's data. Can you believe the BS answer
>>I got?! I can't believe these guys actually do business! Only God knows
>>what other data problems they have.
>>
>>Regards,
>>Craig
>> Forwarded by Craig Nelson/NY/SBCM on 12/16/97 12:37
>>PM ---------------------------
>
>>BetterData@xxxxxxx on 12/16/97 12:19:29 PM
>>
>>To: Craig Nelson/NY/SBCM
>>cc:
>>Subject: Re: Cash Index
>>In a message dated 97-12-16 11:30:44 EST, you write:
>>> >>partial snip
>>> Also, I found major diffs between your
>>> data and Bloomberg's for *INDU, on the High, Low, and Open; the Close
>>was
>>> OK. Some diffs were as much as 20 points or so. Can I ask why this
>>would
>>> happen? Do you check your data against a second source to verify
>>accuracy?
>>The prices we get show the theoretical highs and lows for these indices;
>>Bloomberg probably gets the actuals highs and lows. So typically our ranges
>>will be greater.
>>>>small snip
>>
>>- Tim
>
>Don't be TOO shocked Craig, but even infamous NASDAQ-listed DBC Signal uses
'theoretical' OHL numbers on the DOW, which often differ widely from the
actual numbers, whilst their counterpart DBC BMI posts the 'actual' Dow
numbers. Go figure!
>
>For example, to illustrate my point, as I'm writing this at 10:45 PST, DBC
Signal International Feed is reporting for the Dow: 7839.29 Open, 8059.86
High 7910.16 Low ( which believe it or not actually changed in the ten
minutes that I was writing this and not by any material change in the Dow
numbers I might add.)
>
>DBC BMI reports for the Dow: 7924.34 Open, 8020.32 High and 7924.34 Low.
>
>Signal reports a theoretical calculation while BMI reports an 'actual' OHL.
>
>CLOSE is 'usually' the same and often not always 'exactly' the same.
>
>OTOH, BMI often reports erroneous 'Net' +- change in points, while the DBC
Signal numbers on 'Net' are usually correct. That may not sound like a big
deal but I sometimes use those Net change numbers in quick trading
decisions, so to me it is an annoyance when they are wrong and I ask you:
How tough could it be to program the computer software to make that
calculation correctly?
>
>Craig Nelson said about Prophet:
>
>>Can you believe the BS answer I got?! I can't believe these guys actually
do >business! Only God knows what other data problems they have.
>
>It appears the same can possibly also be said about others in the data
providing business.
>
Michael Paauwe
mpaauwe@xxxxxxxxxx
|